Patent trolling is nothing new. Basically, it's a pejorative term for practices such as enforcing patents against purported infringers without intent to manufacture the patented product. But apparently Clive D. Menezes, a Halliburton patent attorney, believes that patent trolling is somewhat novel, or at least, is a novel enough practice to patent.

According to Dennis Crouch at Patently-O, Menezes filed for patent protection claiming a method of "patent acquisition and assertion by a (non-inventor) first party against a second party." The process involves acquiring an equity interest in a patent, writing a claim within the scope of the patent that is broad enough to cover a product of a second party, filing the claim and then pursuing an infringement action against the second party.

Menezes won't likely prevail on his claim, contends Crouch. Under the Federal Circuit's recent Bilski decision, business methods are not eligible for patents unless they are tied to a machine and result in a transformation. Menezes' proposed method does neither and thus, does not qualify for patent protection.

Comments

Lawyer Seeks Patent on Form of Patent Trolling

Patent trolling is nothing new. Basically, it's a pejorative term for practices such as enforcing patents against purported infringers without intent to manufacture the patented product. But apparently Clive D. Menezes, a Halliburton patent attorney, believes that patent trolling is somewhat novel, or at least, is a novel enough practice to patent.

According to Dennis Crouch at Patently-O, Menezes filed for patent protection claiming a method of "patent acquisition and assertion by a (non-inventor) first party against a second party." The process involves acquiring an equity interest in a patent, writing a claim within the scope of the patent that is broad enough to cover a product of a second party, filing the claim and then pursuing an infringement action against the second party.

Menezes won't likely prevail on his claim, contends Crouch. Under the Federal Circuit's recent Bilski decision, business methods are not eligible for patents unless they are tied to a machine and result in a transformation. Menezes' proposed method does neither and thus, does not qualify for patent protection.